Sorry if anyone here is working on the effort. But from what's apparent at this links and clicking around (or attempting to--it's quite klugy), doesn't the site and exhibition--in concept and preliminary interaction and visual design--seem, well...a little...trashy? as in track-suit-bum-crack-big-stomach-showing-wore-my-slippers-to-Walmart-hair-pulling-in-the-shampoo-aisle trashy? And also very 2006. Not to mention about a half micron deep.

If someone from Rolling Stones Corp would like a hand with this - toward creating a super compelling, immersive, interactive, multiplemedia transplatform experience that also has even a smidge of substance, dignity, and credibility, please contact me.

The Stones deserve better.

I'm surprised Charlotte Watts would have allowed things to get this far.

What's here is, in now way, reflective of men of wealth and taste

Love that something is happening, but let's do much better. It could be great!

I know some relevant exhibition models that could be adapted and...Stones have all the money in the world to do something innovative and, yes, fun, but not vulgar and dumm--worthy of the Stones while they're still here, as well as worthy in terms of legacy, this exhibition not being remembered as silly clownishness.

Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far.

Sorry if anyone here is working on the effort. But from what's apparent at this links and clicking around (or attempting to--it's quite klugy), doesn't the site and exhibition--in concept and preliminary interaction and visual design--seem, well...a little...trashy? as in track-suit-bum-crack-big-stomach-showing-wore-my-slippers-to-Walmart-hair-pulling-in-the-shampoo-aisle trashy? And also very 2006. Not to mention about a half micron deep.

If someone from Rolling Stones Corp would like a hand with this - toward creating a super compelling, immersive, interactive, multiplemedia transplatform experience that also has even a smidge of substance, dignity, and credibility, please contact me.

The Stones deserve better.

I'm surprised Charlotte Watts would have allowed things to get this far.

What's here is, in now way, reflective of men of wealth and taste

Love that something is happening, but let's do much better. It could be great!

I know some relevant exhibition models that could be adapted and...Stones have all the money in the world to do something innovative and, yes, fun, but not vulgar and dumm--worthy of the Stones while they're still here, as well as worthy in terms of legacy, this exhibition not being remembered as silly clownishness.

Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far.

-swiss

So you are basing this on a short trailer? And do you honestly dare to offer your services to rectify something the Stones have clearly signed off on?

"Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far."

Sorry to be pessimistic but it probably already has! Whoever heard of pre sales for an art gallery show 9 months hence? The bands marketing machinery will be testing out the appetite by seeing how much interest they get from their pre sale. -1 here!

lmfao. Yeah swiss clearly they are not taking this too seriously. Who knows how it will turn out but the artistic value does seem to be a bit lacking with the preliminary promotion. I hope we can't judge the gallery content by the crappy web content and design. Whats up with all the pink and the cheap fonts?

With The Experience Project in Seattle and The GD Library in Santa Cruz there are certainly some good models for this type of thing.

Sorry if anyone here is working on the effort. But from what's apparent at this links and clicking around (or attempting to--it's quite klugy), doesn't the site and exhibition--in concept and preliminary interaction and visual design--seem, well...a little...trashy? as in track-suit-bum-crack-big-stomach-showing-wore-my-slippers-to-Walmart-hair-pulling-in-the-shampoo-aisle trashy? And also very 2006. Not to mention about a half micron deep.

If someone from Rolling Stones Corp would like a hand with this - toward creating a super compelling, immersive, interactive, multiplemedia transplatform experience that also has even a smidge of substance, dignity, and credibility, please contact me.

The Stones deserve better.

I'm surprised Charlotte Watts would have allowed things to get this far.

What's here is, in now way, reflective of men of wealth and taste

Love that something is happening, but let's do much better. It could be great!

I know some relevant exhibition models that could be adapted and...Stones have all the money in the world to do something innovative and, yes, fun, but not vulgar and dumm--worthy of the Stones while they're still here, as well as worthy in terms of legacy, this exhibition not being remembered as silly clownishness.

Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far.

-swiss

So you are basing this on a short trailer? And do you honestly dare to offer your services to rectify something the Stones have clearly signed off on?

You should show some respect for their judgement.

"Dare"? lol! Of course I dare. They'd be well-served if they took me up on my offer of a consultation. I respect them, and care about their reputation. But I can't respect their judgement on this one. A trailer is a demo; it shows you what to expect. Still, there are 10 months to pull it together, so all is not lost.

Sorry if anyone here is working on the effort. But from what's apparent at this links and clicking around (or attempting to--it's quite klugy), doesn't the site and exhibition--in concept and preliminary interaction and visual design--seem, well...a little...trashy? as in track-suit-bum-crack-big-stomach-showing-wore-my-slippers-to-Walmart-hair-pulling-in-the-shampoo-aisle trashy? And also very 2006. Not to mention about a half micron deep.

If someone from Rolling Stones Corp would like a hand with this - toward creating a super compelling, immersive, interactive, multiplemedia transplatform experience that also has even a smidge of substance, dignity, and credibility, please contact me.

The Stones deserve better.

I'm surprised Charlotte Watts would have allowed things to get this far.

What's here is, in now way, reflective of men of wealth and taste

Love that something is happening, but let's do much better. It could be great!

I know some relevant exhibition models that could be adapted and...Stones have all the money in the world to do something innovative and, yes, fun, but not vulgar and dumm--worthy of the Stones while they're still here, as well as worthy in terms of legacy, this exhibition not being remembered as silly clownishness.

Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far.

-swiss

So you are basing this on a short trailer? And do you honestly dare to offer your services to rectify something the Stones have clearly signed off on?

You should show some respect for their judgement.

"Dare"? lol! Of course I dare. They'd be well-served if they took me up on my offer of a consultation. I respect them, and care about their reputation. But I can't respect their judgement on this one. A trailer is a demo; it shows you what to expect. Still, there are 10 months to pull it together, so all is not lost.

- swiss

I think you have an over exaggerated idea of your own importance. The Stones have always had a brash and sometimes vulgar side. As i said if this has been signed off by the Stones then fine by me.

Quoteswiss"Dare"? lol! Of course I dare. They'd be well-served if they took me up on my offer of a consultation. I respect them, and care about their reputation. But I can't respect their judgement on this one. A trailer is a demo; it shows you what to expect. Still, there are 10 months to pull it together, so all is not lost.

- swiss

I think you have an over exaggerated idea of your own importance. The Stones have always had a brash and sometimes vulgar side. As i said if this has been signed off by the Stones then fine by me.

I think you may underestimate the talents and skills of people on this board MrWooft. Besides this is clearly a work in progress and I'm not so sure brash and vulgar is entirely applicable when the mission statement is "EXHIBITIONISM will be the most comprehensive and immersive insight into a group described by critics as The Greatest Rock ‘n’ Roll Band".

Sorry if anyone here is working on the effort. But from what's apparent at this links and clicking around (or attempting to--it's quite klugy), doesn't the site and exhibition--in concept and preliminary interaction and visual design--seem, well...a little...trashy? as in track-suit-bum-crack-big-stomach-showing-wore-my-slippers-to-Walmart-hair-pulling-in-the-shampoo-aisle trashy? And also very 2006. Not to mention about a half micron deep.

If someone from Rolling Stones Corp would like a hand with this - toward creating a super compelling, immersive, interactive, multiplemedia transplatform experience that also has even a smidge of substance, dignity, and credibility, please contact me.

The Stones deserve better.

I'm surprised Charlotte Watts would have allowed things to get this far.

What's here is, in now way, reflective of men of wealth and taste

Love that something is happening, but let's do much better. It could be great!

I know some relevant exhibition models that could be adapted and...Stones have all the money in the world to do something innovative and, yes, fun, but not vulgar and dumm--worthy of the Stones while they're still here, as well as worthy in terms of legacy, this exhibition not being remembered as silly clownishness.

Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far.

-swiss

So you are basing this on a short trailer? And do you honestly dare to offer your services to rectify something the Stones have clearly signed off on?

You should show some respect for their judgement.

"Dare"? lol! Of course I dare. They'd be well-served if they took me up on my offer of a consultation. I respect them, and care about their reputation. But I can't respect their judgement on this one. A trailer is a demo; it shows you what to expect. Still, there are 10 months to pull it together, so all is not lost.

- swiss

I think you have an over exaggerated idea of your own importance. The Stones have always had a brash and sometimes vulgar side. As i said if this has been signed off by the Stones then fine by me.

That's great if it's fine by you. Idea of my "own importance"? Not really. I'm definitely not very "important." Important isn't all that, er, important to me.

But I'm good at what I do. And I --and many others-- could do better than this. Now, maybe the curation itself is brilliant. For everyone's sake, I hope so! And maybe it is just a marketing/branding problem. If so, it can and will most likely be toned down and tweaked soon. If not, I'll certainly not be the only one wrinkling their nose.

These people aren't my gods. They aren't even my mayor. Or priest or landlord. They're great artists and entertainers, and for some reason they selected an exhibitions company that seems out of step with presumably what most of the Stones' goals would be in holding a major exhibition. Aside from monetization, that is. They're better than having monetization being the end-all and be-all, at this point of their lives and careers. The Stones do have a brand, and it is materially different from, say, the Glasgow Commonwealth Games, or an Australian SuperCar racing outfit, which could stand to have flashy exhibitions and web experiences.

Brash and vulgar is one thing. Cheap, vulgar (and yesterday's papers) is another. Again, maybe the collecting and curation has been thoughtful and will be interesting - but the marketing - subpar.

They have certainly chosen a superb venue. The Saatchi Gallery is an extraordinary building with huge rooms in which to display works of art and exhibitions of all sorts. One of the best in London in fact. It is also, usually, free to enter apart from specific exhibitions such as this one about The Stones. Worth visiting if ever you are in town.

Sorry if anyone here is working on the effort. But from what's apparent at this links and clicking around (or attempting to--it's quite klugy), doesn't the site and exhibition--in concept and preliminary interaction and visual design--seem, well...a little...trashy? as in track-suit-bum-crack-big-stomach-showing-wore-my-slippers-to-Walmart-hair-pulling-in-the-shampoo-aisle trashy? And also very 2006. Not to mention about a half micron deep.

If someone from Rolling Stones Corp would like a hand with this - toward creating a super compelling, immersive, interactive, multiplemedia transplatform experience that also has even a smidge of substance, dignity, and credibility, please contact me.

The Stones deserve better.

I'm surprised Charlotte Watts would have allowed things to get this far.

What's here is, in now way, reflective of men of wealth and taste

Love that something is happening, but let's do much better. It could be great!

I know some relevant exhibition models that could be adapted and...Stones have all the money in the world to do something innovative and, yes, fun, but not vulgar and dumm--worthy of the Stones while they're still here, as well as worthy in terms of legacy, this exhibition not being remembered as silly clownishness.

Sorry to be blunt -- but it needs to be said now before design/development goes too far.

-swiss

So you are basing this on a short trailer? And do you honestly dare to offer your services to rectify something the Stones have clearly signed off on?

You should show some respect for their judgement.

"Dare"? lol! Of course I dare. They'd be well-served if they took me up on my offer of a consultation. I respect them, and care about their reputation. But I can't respect their judgement on this one. A trailer is a demo; it shows you what to expect. Still, there are 10 months to pull it together, so all is not lost.

- swiss

I think you have an over exaggerated idea of your own importance. The Stones have always had a brash and sometimes vulgar side. As i said if this has been signed off by the Stones then fine by me.

That's great if it's fine by you. Idea of my "own importance"? Not really. I'm definitely not very "important." Important isn't all that, er, important to me.

But I'm good at what I do. And I --and many others-- could do better than this. Now, maybe the curation itself is brilliant. For everyone's sake, I hope so! And maybe it is just a marketing/branding problem. If so, it can and will most likely be toned down and tweaked soon. If not, I'll certainly not be the only one wrinkling their nose.

These people aren't my gods. They aren't even my mayor. Or priest or landlord. They're great artists and entertainers, and for some reason they selected an exhibitions company that seems out of step with presumably what most of the Stones' goals would be in holding a major exhibition. Aside from monetization, that is. They're better than having monetization being the end-all and be-all, at this point of their lives and careers. The Stones do have a brand, and it is materially different from, say, the Glasgow Commonwealth Games, or an Australian SuperCar racing outfit, which could stand to have flashy exhibitions and web experiences.

Brash and vulgar is one thing. Cheap, vulgar (and yesterday's papers) is another. Again, maybe the collecting and curation has been thoughtful and will be interesting - but the marketing - subpar.

- swiss

Clearly, the Stones have scored a massive own goal by not hiring you for your talents. Stand by the fax machine. I am sure Keith will be in touch shortly.

Quoteswiss"Dare"? lol! Of course I dare. They'd be well-served if they took me up on my offer of a consultation. I respect them, and care about their reputation. But I can't respect their judgement on this one. A trailer is a demo; it shows you what to expect. Still, there are 10 months to pull it together, so all is not lost.

- swiss

I think you have an over exaggerated idea of your own importance. The Stones have always had a brash and sometimes vulgar side. As i said if this has been signed off by the Stones then fine by me.

I think you may underestimate the talents and skills of people on this board MrWooft. Besides this is clearly a work in progress and I'm not so sure brash and vulgar is entirely applicable when the mission statement is "EXHIBITIONISM will be the most comprehensive and immersive insight into a group described by critics as The Greatest Rock ‘n’ Roll Band".

Indeed I must have underestimated everyones talents. It beggars belief that the Stones haven't handed over their entire operation to IORR members. What bad judgement they display.

I'm sure David Bowie's recent (and ongoing), hugely successful IS exhibit gave them some iDEas. And you will recall, last year at this time (in fact it was a year ago today I was in Stockholm for their show - sigh), that Mick visited the Abba Museum - no doubt to see how other acts have put such a thing together. I thought the quick video/trailer was kind of cool (reminded me a little bit though of the current show opener?). I'm sure this will be a well thought out and fun show that no doubt will draw big crowds in London, and if all goes well, like Bowie's IS, will make the rounds to other cities.